News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by tw1010 on Friday September 15, 2017 @12:51PM (#15258620)
I think it's great that top researchers are actually learning from Kuhn's observations. I have hope that humanity can indeed learn from its earlier historical mistakes, but it requires us to be very aware of them in order to collectively avoid them.
Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by 52-6F-62 on Friday September 15, 2017 @01:03PM (#15258741)
I agree.

Mr Hinton was somewhat vague and brief in his statements here, though. What do you think the crisis point is that he's reached exactly? (It must be sure enough for the man who introduced the paradigm in the first place to have caught on, yet the change of thought process unclear enough for him to recognize that it will be somebody newer who will have to introduce something else)

Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by kobeya on Friday September 15, 2017 @01:58PM (#15259231)
I think his quote is out of context. If he is saying that back propagation networks alone are insufficient for AGI, that is neither surprising nor controversial. Hinton has never been working on the AGI problem. It sounds more like the author is making use of the quotes he/she got from Hinton in the most clickbaity way possible.
Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by 52-6F-62 on Friday September 15, 2017 @03:14PM (#15259919)
I get what you're saying, but I don't think he was speaking explicitly about AGI. To me it didn't sound like they were leaving the applied problems he has worked on. Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but so far there haven't been any major successes in un-supervised learning models and he's suggesting here that rather than continue with the models that have had success up to this point, it would be more worth the energy to start again at a lower level, rethinking the problem, in order to achieve similar results unsupervised.

This may be where my limited knowledge is my handicap, but I didn't think you would need an AGI in order to achieve unsupervised learning. There would still be an input and an output as there is now -- but instead of massive datasets used in training the models could simple experience the problem in real time, adjusting and learning based upon new results. Of course unsupervised learning models could contribute greatly to the pursuit of AGI, but I didn't think AGI predicate unsupervised learning models (which is what I am taking from the article -- or more like article abstract -- here).

Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by kobeya on Friday September 15, 2017 @03:29PM (#15260030)
> Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but so far there haven't been any major successes in un-supervised learning models

Word2vec, a variant of which is Transform, Google's new machine translation framework which beats the pants off every other approach, to name one. The system it is replacing is also unsupervised.

Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by argonaut on Saturday September 16, 2017 @03:21AM (#15263388)
Transformer is heavily reliant on supervised learning. Not sure where you're getting that from.
Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by kobeya on Sunday September 17, 2017 @02:55AM (#15268552)
I was talking about word2vec.
Re:Artificial intelligence pioneer says we need to start over by 52-6F-62 on Friday September 15, 2017 @04:45PM (#15260637)
I hadn't heard of that at all! Thanks. I'll check it out.